• Current Events, Politics
    & Science

    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • CEPS Moderators: cduggles | Deru | mal3volent
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Election 2020 The Final Countdown v. Nov. 3rd

birdup.snaildown

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 5, 2020
Messages
537
If a president somehow managed to force an election in his favour, the American people wouldn't take it.

There would be a war.
The US is not Russia.
 

alasdairm

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Messages
62,358
Location
south lake tahoe, ca
Speaking of media and their bullshit though I was horrified when I saw the below last night. More so because this was PBS! I had respect for them. But since when do they post opinions and factually incorrect information in the form of banners or graphics during a press conference

there are a number of banners in that clip. which specific statements do you feel are inaccurate?

alasdair
 

dalpat077

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
318
there are a number of banners in that clip. which specific statements do you feel are inaccurate?

alasdair
I'll go through it and list them (one or two technically incorrect and some opinion or speculation based).

Will do it tomorrow though. Sorry. Already gotten into shit now for spending too much time here. Pisses me off. Sorry.
 

dalpat077

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
318
If a president somehow managed to force an election in his favour, the American people wouldn't take it.

There would be a war.
The US is not Russia.
Just quick note:

Not saying Trump would orchestrate anything or force the election once he has exhausted every possible legal avenue or tried to exploit any constitutional loopholes (assuming there are any at all).
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
For the record (just so I don't get called out again and be accused on not knowing what I'm talking about):

I know the procedure under normal circumstances. But looking for the particular premise that I've put forward wasn't on my radar at the time. And I'm wondering if it was something that the Founding Fathers could have even dreamed of or foreseen as being a remote possible set of circumstances.

Whatever the case and before I've found and read the relevant:

It's not that far fetched of a premise.

May be worth looking at under what circumstances a POTUS has the authority to declare Martial Law and what effect that would have on an election (and particularly an election that is technically or legally or constitutionally still in limbo) (which it is no matter what anybody wishes to believe).

It wouldn't have any effect on the election.

The presidents term lasts 4 years. At which point he has to be reelected by the electoral college to continue.

There's no way around it without a constitutional amendment.

Martial law won't change it.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
If a president somehow managed to force an election in his favour, the American people wouldn't take it.

There would be a war.
The US is not Russia.

I'm afraid I don't agree with that anymore.

There's only 2 possibilities here. One is that trump just refuses to leave, in which case he will simply be removed by force, no problem.

But if by some miracle he actually did convince multiple states to ignore the will of the people and directly appoint electors for their states, sure there would be riots. But in the end he would be victorious.

And the reason he would be able to pull it off if he manages to subvert the system like this (and it's super unlikely) is because so much of the country doesn't actually care.

There are a lot of Americans. Not most, but a disturbingly large number that honestly wouldn't care if trump became president for life. They wouldn't care how he did it. And they would call themselves patriots in the process.

It's shocking how many "patriots" would celebrate the destruction of the systems that have defined America for hundreds of years.
 

cduggles

Moderator: CEPS, Words
Staff member
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
13,915
Location
A chromatically corrected world
What, if any, provisions are made should something unfortunate happen to a President (Elect?) and a Vice President (Elect?) under this particular set of circumstances i.e. given that it's a change in Political Party to boot?
Side note: The Vice President doesn’t necessarily become president if the president-elect dies until Congress declares the winner of the vote by the electoral college.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE WINNING PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DIES AFTER THE ELECTION?

The 20th Amendment says the term of the current president and vice president ends at noon on Jan. 20. There is no provision to extend it. The amendment also says if the president-elect dies, the vice president-elect shall be sworn in as president at the start of the new term.

However, the winning candidate doesn’t become president-elect until a joint session of Congress counts the votes from the Electoral College and declares a winner, Pildes said.

By law, Congress is scheduled to formally receive the votes from the Electoral College on Jan. 6. The new Congress, which will be elected in November and sworn into office on Jan. 3, will preside.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE WINNING CANDIDATE DIES BEFORE CONGRESS DECLARES A WINNER?

“That’s the worst, most confusing time,” said John Fortier, director of governmental studies at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “They are going to have to figure out what to do with (Electoral College) votes cast for a candidate who has died.”

If the winning candidate dies before the Electoral College meets, the electors could coalesce around a replacement candidate recommended by the party, perhaps the vice presidential candidate.

“For the most part, these people are picked because they are loyal party people,” Fortier said. “You could have a few stray here or there, but they are not rebels.”

A party’s electors would have an incentive to coalesce around one candidate, he said, because they wouldn’t want to risk throwing the election to the other party. But there is no guarantee they would all agree on a replacement candidate.

Some states have laws that require electors to vote for the presidential candidate who won the statewide vote; other states could quickly pass laws governing the electors in the event that a candidate dies.

“The party can say what the party wants, but the states would decide what to do with those electors,” Hasen said.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in July that states may require electors to support the candidate picked by voters in the election. However, the court left open what would happen if the candidate dies.

“Nothing in this opinion should be taken to permit the states to bind electors to a deceased candidate,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a footnote to her majority opinion.

If this happens, expect litigation.

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF CONGRESS?

The 12th Amendment to the Constitution gives Congress the final say on who is elected president and vice president. Congress decides whether to accept or reject slates of electors from the Electoral College and to determine whether a candidate has won the required 270 electoral votes to become president.

As a check on this power, both the House and Senate must agree to reject a slate of electors. If the two chambers don’t agree, the electors get counted under federal law, said Michael Morley, an assistant law professor at Florida State University.

If no candidate reaches 270 electoral votes, the House chooses the president and the Senate chooses the vice president, in a process spelled out in the Constitution.

In the House, each state delegation gets one vote for president, and they must choose among the three candidates who received the most votes in the Electoral College. Currently, Republicans have a majority in 26 state delegations, but the numbers could change after the November elections and a new Congress takes office.

The Senate would choose the vice president by a simple majority vote.

Election experts said they wouldn’t expect the courts to play a role at this point because the Constitution clearly grants Congress the authority to resolve a disputed election for president.

The Supreme Court did effectively decide the 2000 presidential election in favor of Republican George W. Bush by ending the recount in Florida. But the court’s ruling came before the Electoral College votes were presented to Congress.

“It is really in Congress’ hands after the electors have voted,” Fortier said.

 

alasdairm

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Messages
62,358
Location
south lake tahoe, ca
It's shocking how many "patriots" would celebrate the destruction of the systems that have defined America for hundreds of years.

not only that, but systems of which they have trumpeted the importance loudly and frequently.

they're all about law and order and the importance of the constitution right up until they're not...

alasdair
 

dalpat077

Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
318
Just being doing some little bit of reading. It doesn’t seem as clear cut to me.

Alright here’s the scenario (and this merely for the sake of debate and enlightenment).

Trump carries on the way he is currently. Not all states have certified their votes yet. Trump, like it or not, is currently the POTUS. And I would argue that as things stand right now: Biden and Harris are technically still not President Elect or Vice President Elect.

Somebody takes it upon themselves to eliminate Biden and Harris (not an outsider or another country i.e. just one or two fanatical Trump supporters that are the butt of some comments here and may not be stable but may be well trained in the necessary).

President Trump immediately declares a national emergency. The declaration of a national emergency gives the President an extraordinary amount of powers and some of which, I’m guessing, could be used, at very least, to delay all matters while an investigation was being initiated.

Unlikely. Yes. Impossible. No. Relatively simple. Yes. Trump responsible or directly connected. No.

From the little bit that I have read thus far: this particular scenario does not seem to have been planned for and would cause a fair amount of uncertainty as to where to from there as there is no precedent.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
Just being doing some little bit of reading. It doesn’t seem as clear cut to me.

Alright here’s the scenario (and this merely for the sake of debate and enlightenment).

Trump carries on the way he is currently. Not all states have certified their votes yet. Trump, like it or not, is currently the POTUS. And I would argue that as things stand right now: Biden and Harris are technically still not President Elect or Vice President Elect.

Somebody takes it upon themselves to eliminate Biden and Harris (not an outsider or another country i.e. just one or two fanatical Trump supporters that are the butt of some comments here and may not be stable but may be well trained in the necessary).

President Trump immediately declares a national emergency. The declaration of a national emergency gives the President an extraordinary amount of powers and some of which, I’m guessing, could be used, at very least, to delay all matters while an investigation was being initiated.

Unlikely. Yes. Impossible. No. Relatively simple. Yes. Trump responsible or directly connected. No.

From the little bit that I have read thus far: this particular scenario does not seem to have been planned for and would cause a fair amount of uncertainty as to where to from there as there is no precedent.

Even taking all of that at face value. It doesn't fix the big problem.

Putting aside that Biden and Harris have secret service protection, so this isnt what I'd call simple.

The big problem is trump hasn't actually been reelected. Unless you can somehow also fix it so trump wins the electoral college, none of it will matter, his term will still expire and continuity of government procedures take over. The new leader will then direct the executive law enforcement agencies to arrest trump for creating an insurrection.

Trump can't continue withing winning the electoral college in December. No matter what else happens.
 

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
2,325
I'm not entirely certain Trump's endgame here is to win anymore.

There seems to be ulterior motives and moves happening and being presented as his narcissism and denial, perhaps for financial gain after he leaves office?
 

cduggles

Moderator: CEPS, Words
Staff member
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
13,915
Location
A chromatically corrected world
The electors will vote, and then Congress will decide whether or not to accept that vote. It’s all in the 12th Amendment.
If both the President and VP died, Congress still certifies the winner. After that happens, the controlling party has been determined.
So if they died now, it would be the worst possible confusion, but if they died after Congress certified the Democrat candidate as the winner, then it would just be a matter of which person the Democrats picked.
I’m fairly sure the line of succession is only applicable if Trump and Pence die right now.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
I'm not entirely certain Trump's endgame here is to win anymore.

There seems to be ulterior motives and moves happening and being presented as his narcissism and denial, perhaps for financial gain after he leaves office?

No I think his endgame is to win, and if that fails, cause as much damage as possible to use to try and seize power again in a later election.

I believe his goal here is to create as much uncertainty and chaos with these bs fraud allegations in the hopes of getting this so stalled that enough states aren't able to vote against him in the EC. Either by failing to certify and not participating, or failing to certify and or getting the state legislator to appoint republican electors.

Hence why he is putting so much pressure on Republicans in key positions to obstruct.

It's unlikely to work but he will try anything to keep power.

When it most likely fails, he will cause as much damage to the country as he can in order to later blame it on biden.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
I don’t think Trump will run again in 2024. Does anyone think he will?

I think it's entirely plausible.

Funny thing is, I still suspect trump probably didn't entirely plan to win back in 2016. If he'd lost then, he'd have cried fraud but I think he'd likely have just dropped it.

But now he's seen the power he has, he's used to it. And like any good narcissist he needs the continued adoration.

He will never give it up now if he has a choice.
 

cduggles

Moderator: CEPS, Words
Staff member
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
13,915
Location
A chromatically corrected world
Just being doing some little bit of reading. It doesn’t seem as clear cut to me.

Alright here’s the scenario (and this merely for the sake of debate and enlightenment).

Trump carries on the way he is currently. Not all states have certified their votes yet. Trump, like it or not, is currently the POTUS. And I would argue that as things stand right now: Biden and Harris are technically still not President Elect or Vice President Elect.

Somebody takes it upon themselves to eliminate Biden and Harris (not an outsider or another country i.e. just one or two fanatical Trump supporters that are the butt of some comments here and may not be stable but may be well trained in the necessary).

President Trump immediately declares a national emergency. The declaration of a national emergency gives the President an extraordinary amount of powers and some of which, I’m guessing, could be used, at very least, to delay all matters while an investigation was being initiated.

Unlikely. Yes. Impossible. No. Relatively simple. Yes. Trump responsible or directly connected. No.

From the little bit that I have read thus far: this particular scenario does not seem to have been planned for and would cause a fair amount of uncertainty as to where to from there as there is no precedent.
Harris doesn’t fit into the equation. She isn’t necessarily going to become president if Biden dies.
See this article:
The worst possible scenario is Biden dying before Congress accepts the votes of the electors.
 
Last edited:

Deru

Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
2,325
I don’t think Trump will run again in 2024. Does anyone think he will?

I really doubt it. Once he concedes and/or is forced out, I think that will be it for Trump. As far another Trump, who knows.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
10,310
But he could lose, and I don’t think he wants to look like a loser again.

He already worked out the solution to that in 2016.

Trump never loses. Ever. He just either wins or wins but has his win stolen by fraud.

You see in trump world, the vast majority of the country wants him. Only evil democrats who hate America don't want him so they rig the vote every time.

But soooo many people vote for trump, the attempts to rig it sometimes fail, that's how many people vote for him.
 
Top